Leo vetoes IFC recommendations
Eliminates day care funding,
proposes increase for AD
By ARTBUSHNELL
Of the Emerald
ASUO President Greg Leo sent the 1973-74 in
cidental fees budget back to committee late Thurs
day night after vetoing five program budgets and
conditionally vetoing 12 others.
Among the five outright vetos, Leo proposed
four programs—the Child Care and Development
Center (CCDC), Migrant Labor Project, Can
terbury Center and Action Now—be completely
eliminated from incidental fee funding.
The fifth outright veto—the Incidental Fee
Committee’s proposals of funding the University’s
Athletic Department $135,000—was turned down by
Leo with the suggestion the program needed $15,000
more than the recommendation.
Leo and members of his cabinet discussed the
IFC recommendations until 9:30 Thursday night.
However, the ASUO President said the final
decisions made were his.
“In this process, the final responsibility for
making decisions on incidental fees is the
president’s. Although I conferred with my vice
president, the final decision rested with me.”
Leo said his recommendations should trim
1
Absentees
stall bill
on marijuana
SALEM (Special) — A lack of committee
members stalled passage of a bill which
would legalize private use and possession of
marijuana at a Thursday night meeting of the
Joint Alcohol and Drugs Committee.
Three of the five house members at
tended the meeting — enough to pass the bill
— but the legislators who attended said they
wanted all committee members on record as
supporting or opposing passage of the bill to
the House floor.
The bill (HB 2003), which removes all
penalties for private use and possession for up
to eight ounces of marijuana, is considered a
politically dangerous bill to support.
But a majority of committee members
indicated Thursday they plan to vote to send
the bill to the House floor “with a do pass”
recom mendation.
Committee chairer Rep. Steven Kafoury
(D-Portland) announced that a committee
meeting “around nay desk on the flow” will
be held at 9:25 this morning “to pass the bill
out.”
some money from the $952,444 budget submitted to
him by the committee last week.
He said he had informed Randy Shilts, chairer
of the IFC, of his decisions and would meet with the
committee sometime today to discuss the vetoes.
The committee could override Leo’s recom
mendations with a 4-1 vote. Anything less than that
would approve the president’s proposals.
The ASUO president said his conditional vetos
“are all negotiable between the executive and the
committee. They are programs we have some
questions about on the basis of the level of support
suggested.”
Of the twelve conditional vetos, Leo said fun
ding for five programs—the Erb Memorial Union,
Search, the ASUO Housing Office, the International
Education Center and the Oregon Daily Emerald
should be increased over the levels of funding
originally suggested by the IFC.
He suggested budgets for four other
programs—MEChA, the Native American Student
Union, the Oregon Prisoner’s Coalition and the Gay
Peoples Alliance—should be decreased.
The remaining conditional vetoes—for the
Black Student Union, Graduate Student Council and
KWAX—were for IFC recommendations which
needed redefinition, Leo said. He said figures
submitted to the executive for the BSU and GSC
didn’t add up and needed clarification.
Of the programs in the incidental fee budgets,
recommendations for the Child Care and
Development Center have already created the most
controversy. After the initial proposals for their
program were made by the IFC, representatives of
the program—adults and children—conducted a
protest in Leo’s office.
The president said his Thursday night decision
to eliminate ASUO support for the program “was by
far the hardest decision in this budgetary process.
“There’s no question about the intrinsic value of
the program. It’s just a question of who’s to pay the
bill for day care. I really feel day care is a pretty
good thing. But the service benefits only a few
students and costs all of the students. I had to look at
which programs benefit the most students.”
Leo said the possibility of receiving federal
matching funds was very low and the ASUO
couldn’t support the program on its own.
“Funding day care should be the responsibility
of the University and other levels of government—
like the county and city. Money from those areas
should fund this very vital program.”
The other three programs suggested for
elimination from the incidental fee budget—Action
Now, Migrant Labor Project and Canterbury
Center—“are not really student-directed
programs,” Leo said.
“I feel the funds we have can best be used by
student programs. The benefits of these three are
directed away from the campus. I would rather see
the money going into areas that are pointed at the
campus,” he said.
Leo said the recommendation to increase the
(Continued on Page 8)
Photo by Jacques Beteinber
University student Connie Rogers may have resembled a famous
statue Thursday, but she was really only trying to soak up a few of the
sun’s rays before plunging back into the Willamette River.
Kitties litter kiddies sandboxes at Westmoreland
Children’s sandboxes used as cat
litter boxes at Westmoreland student
housing project are driving frustrated
parents to action.
According to a small group of angry
mothers, cats and dogs are running
rampant in violation of Westmorelandjs
no-pet policy. The objections against
pets by Diane Weame, Linda Loder and
Carol Hanika, residents of West
moreland, were voiced in a petition
circulated by the women to find out how
many residents shared their complaint.
The sudden surfacing of
dissatisfaction was triggered by certain
problems, according to Hanika. “We
are so tired of kids playing in sandboxes
used by cats. A small child tends to eat
anything. Besides the dangerous
disease and infection likely to spread, it
stinks so bad,” said Hanika, “the kids
come home smelling like cat litter
boxes.”
Hanika also cited a few instances of
dogs living in the project who
threatened to attack residents. Other
causes for complaint cited are late
night noises, fleas, and cats who mar
car finishes.
Of the 408 households at West
moreland, over half were visited. Of the
233 households visited, 70 percent
signed the petition calling for en
forcement of the no-pet policy and 29.6
percent would not sign.
Those who refused to sign the petition
gave a variety of reasons, said Hanika.
“Some of the ones who didn’t sign own
pets,” said Hanika, “and some felt that
pets were the individual’s respon
sibility.” Some people just plain don’t
make a habit of signing petitions, she
said, and a few men responded with,
‘it’s not that I don’t like cats, but my
wife would kill me if I sign this.’
The petition is now in the hands of the
University housing officials. Although
no immediate action is pending, Gerald
Bogen, vice president for student
services, indicated appreciation that
the complaints were expressed. Bogen
said that a serious examination of the
pet policy is underway. No evictions
will be issued on the basis of pet
ownership, however, until a definite
policy decision is reached, he said.